Best LCD monitor/card for old eyes

[Josh]

I bought a 19" Princeton VL1918. (the VL stands for "value line". )

Non-gamer. Problem is, with my old eyes, I just can't stand the
native resolution 1280x1024. Graphics are best at this resolution,
but text is terrible.

Text is *best* at 1024x768, but I'm not happy with this resolution.

I currently have a Radeon 9800 Pro, but am building new computer and
not sure what I'll wind up with in that, PCI express I'm sure, but
what model? 6800GT?

But main question, what monitor would be good for me? I've tried
Microsofts Clear Type, and while that helps, it still is crap.
Also tried using large fonts.

Seems like a I read somewhere that Samsung had the highest rated 19"
LCD? But can't find where I read that. 20" is out of the question,
not for price, but because aren't 20" native resolution 1280xwhatever?
That would be even worse for my eyes.

Suggestions?
thanks, josh

 

[House of Brutus]

I bought a 19" Princeton VL1918. (the VL stands for "value line". )

Non-gamer. Problem is, with my old eyes, I just can't stand the
native resolution 1280x1024. Graphics are best at this resolution,
but text is terrible.

Text is *best* at 1024x768, but I'm not happy with this resolution.

I currently have a Radeon 9800 Pro, but am building new computer and
not sure what I'll wind up with in that, PCI express I'm sure, but
what model? 6800GT?

But main question, what monitor would be good for me? I've tried
Microsofts Clear Type, and while that helps, it still is crap.
Also tried using large fonts.

Seems like a I read somewhere that Samsung had the highest rated 19"
LCD? But can't find where I read that. 20" is out of the question,
not for price, but because aren't 20" native resolution 1280xwhatever?
That would be even worse for my eyes.

Suggestions?
thanks, josh

Get a CRT monitor. All LCD's run at high res so the text wil be too
small for you.

 

[Simian Dyson]

I bought a 19" Princeton VL1918. (the VL stands for "value line". )

Non-gamer. Problem is, with my old eyes, I just can't stand the
native resolution 1280x1024. Graphics are best at this resolution,
but text is terrible.

Text is *best* at 1024x768, but I'm not happy with this resolution.

I currently have a Radeon 9800 Pro, but am building new computer and
not sure what I'll wind up with in that, PCI express I'm sure, but
what model? 6800GT?

But main question, what monitor would be good for me? I've tried
Microsofts Clear Type, and while that helps, it still is crap.
Also tried using large fonts.

Seems like a I read somewhere that Samsung had the highest rated 19"
LCD? But can't find where I read that. 20" is out of the question,
not for price, but because aren't 20" native resolution 1280xwhatever?
That would be even worse for my eyes.

Suggestions?
thanks, josh

My current NEC FE700 CRT will die soon, and I'll reluctantly move over to an
LCD. My eyes are aging as well, but I can tell you that my son in law got a
new Dell system with theUltrasharp LCD, and even at the native res, it looks
GREAT. You might want to return that Princeton for something less, erm,
'value.' It's also worth noting that long periods in front of a CRT is
harder on your eyes than an LCD.

 

[George Pontis]

I bought a 19" Princeton VL1918. (the VL stands for "value line". )

Non-gamer. Problem is, with my old eyes, I just can't stand the
native resolution 1280x1024. Graphics are best at this resolution,
but text is terrible.

Text is best at 1024x768, but I'm not happy with this resolution.

I currently have a Radeon 9800 Pro, but am building new computer and
not sure what I'll wind up with in that, PCI express I'm sure, but
what model? 6800GT?

But main question, what monitor would be good for me? I've tried
Microsofts Clear Type, and while that helps, it still is crap.
Also tried using large fonts.

Seems like a I read somewhere that Samsung had the highest rated 19"
LCD? But can't find where I read that. 20" is out of the question,
not for price, but because aren't 20" native resolution 1280xwhatever?
That would be even worse for my eyes.

Suggestions?
thanks, josh

Exactly what is the problem with your monitor ? If it is that the text
is too small, then using large fonts would fix that. Large fonts could
give you sharp and well formed characters that are easy to see due to
the large size. You would have the benefit of the higher resolution
1280x1024 with fonts that you can make as big as you want.

Is the monitor not displaying clearly ? If you used reading glasses or
a magnifier to look closely at the screen, do the characters look very
sharp ? They should on a LCD monitor. If not, be sure that you run the
monitor's function to autoadjust to the graphics card output. There is
often a button on the front of the monitor that will make the necessary
adjustments to get the sharpest image. If you cannot get a very sharp
image at 1280x1024 then you may have an inadequate video card or a poor
quality video cable. If you had a DVI output on your video card and
used a DVI cable you could get a perfect image displayed on the monitor.

You can look at some CRT monitors as the other poster suggested but I
don't think you really need a different monitor. The CRT monitors have
some appeal for photographers and gamers. For pure legibility I think a
LCD monitor, running at its native resolution, is best. You could go to
a 21" LCD or all the way up to a 23" LCD with very large font
characters an that is as good as it gets for easy viewing. But the
monitor you have is a fine unit and if it is configured suitably I
think you should find it very satisfactory.

--

 

[David Maynard]

I bought a 19" Princeton VL1918. (the VL stands for "value line". )

Non-gamer. Problem is, with my old eyes, I just can't stand the
native resolution 1280x1024. Graphics are best at this resolution,
but text is terrible.

Text is *best* at 1024x768, but I'm not happy with this resolution.

Why not happy?

I currently have a Radeon 9800 Pro, but am building new computer and
not sure what I'll wind up with in that, PCI express I'm sure, but
what model? 6800GT?

But main question, what monitor would be good for me? I've tried
Microsofts Clear Type, and while that helps, it still is crap.
Also tried using large fonts.

If the problem is text size, don't just use just the simple, global, 'large
fonts' but, in addition, set all the individual fonts to a larger point
size that suits you in display, appearance, advanced. That way you can
'tune' them.

 

[Josh]

Exactly what is the problem with your monitor ? If it is that the text
is too small, then using large fonts would fix that. Large fonts could
give you sharp and well formed characters that are easy to see due to
the large size. You would have the benefit of the higher resolution
1280x1024 with fonts that you can make as big as you want.

I've tried large fonts. Like the Clear Type, that helped some. It
seems like some text displays fine, and some doesn't. I'm sure the
text that displays fine is a different font than what doesn't display
fine......I guess I just expected ALL fonts to look better.

Is the monitor not displaying clearly ? If you used reading glasses or
a magnifier to look closely at the screen, do the characters look very
sharp ? They should on a LCD monitor. If not, be sure that you run the
monitor's function to autoadjust to the graphics card output. There is
often a button on the front of the monitor that will make the necessary
adjustments to get the sharpest image. If you cannot get a very sharp
image at 1280x1024 then you may have an inadequate video card or a poor
quality video cable. If you had a DVI output on your video card and
used a DVI cable you could get a perfect image displayed on the monitor.

They don't look sharp to me (in winXP-a little blurry), although I
dual boot, and they look much better in Win2000 than they do in
WinXP....which, they did also with my old CRT, which is why I got a
new monitor in the first place. I think my Raedon 9800 Pro certainly
should be more than adequate. This did come with DVI cable, I hadn't
tried using it because from what all I've heard, it won't make a
perceivable difference. However, I will try it before I return
monitor. Actually, come to think of it, I'm using my old monitor's
video cable instead of the new one. Will for sure try using the DVI
cable.

Thanks, Josh

 

[Josh]

Why not happy?

It seems to me that even at 1024x768 (which is not it's native res.),
text looks *better*, but is still a little blurry - although I can
live with it. However, when I edit photo's, they look better in 1280
than they do in 1024

If the problem is text size, don't just use just the simple, global, 'large
fonts' but, in addition, set all the individual fonts to a larger point
size that suits you in display, appearance, advanced. That way you can
'tune' them.

I didn't like the global "large fonts', but I will try to set them
individually

Thanks, Josh

 

[David Maynard]

It seems to me that even at 1024x768 (which is not it's native res.),
text looks *better*, but is still a little blurry - although I can
live with it. However, when I edit photo's, they look better in 1280
than they do in 1024




I didn't like the global "large fonts', but I will try to set them
individually

Thanks, Josh

Well, you've provided a description now, "blurry." That sounds like a
cable/timing problem. Use the DVI cable.

 

[JAD]

to be honest josh I like the LCD over some CRTs for a couple of reasons
one is that you can move the darn thing right up to your nose if your want
I use a LCD / CRT dual monitor setup. CRT for the workspace and the LCD for
palettes, tool controls, and time lines etc. when working with imaging.
another nice deal is they don't radiate the same bad stuff as
CRT's...although I couldn't tell you if they in fact even radiate anything.
Windows? Bill gave you some tools to work with AFA accessibility. Linux
users have to build that stuff.

http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Accessibility-HOWTO/linuxos.html#AEN67

 

[DaveW]

20" LCD monitors are worse for resolution in your case:
1600 x 1200.

 

[Josh]

I tried the DVI cable, no difference that I could tell.
At 1024x the text looks a little blurry, or "soft-focus" might be a
better term.

At 1280x, the text looks spiderweb thin.

Probably my eyes though, I have bifocals, and eye problems in general.

Thanks, Josh

But, just for kicks, can someone tell me the top rated 19" LCD
monitor?

 

[David Maynard]

I tried the DVI cable, no difference that I could tell.
At 1024x the text looks a little blurry, or "soft-focus" might be a
better term.

At 1280x, the text looks spiderweb thin.

Ok. Well, I was having problems understanding what you meant. Blurry all
the time might be a cable problem but since it's sharp at 1280 I suspect
it's just the attempt to do 1024 when that isn't the native resolution. It
doesn't 'fit', if you see what I mean. A 1024 'pixel' would be 1.25 the
size of a 1280 pixel but there aren't any that size, nor are there any 1/4
size pixels. So what do you lite up for a 1.25 dot when there are only
whole size dots?

Your best bet is to do the individual font point size, at the 1280
resolution, like I originally suggested, and maybe bold them too, to
'fatten' them up. And turn off the 'clear type' when you do. That DOES
'fuzzy' them up.

 

[House of Brutus]

Exactly what is the problem with your monitor ? If it is that the text
is too small, then using large fonts would fix that. Large fonts could
give you sharp and well formed characters that are easy to see due to
the large size.

That's not going to help when reading websites that use fixed fonts.

 

[House of Brutus]

Why not happy?

I expect because on an LCD with a native res of 1280x1024 the fonts
look fuzzy at 1024x768. As I have already stated, his solution is to
get a nice CRT monitor and run that at 1024x768. That's what I do. I
have an LCD too on my other computer but I prefer the CRT for various
reason, one being that I can run my CRT monitor at any res and the
fonts are sharp still.

 

[Odie Ferrous]

I tried the DVI cable, no difference that I could tell.
At 1024x the text looks a little blurry, or "soft-focus" might be a
better term.

At 1280x, the text looks spiderweb thin.

Probably my eyes though, I have bifocals, and eye problems in general.

Thanks, Josh

But, just for kicks, can someone tell me the top rated 19" LCD
monitor?

Get a monitor that Mac designers use.

The Cinema screens are expensive although I have a 20" Cinema and the
resolution is incredible - but Formac do some good screens as well and
at more reasonable prices.


Odie

 

[Mxsmanic]

Non-gamer. Problem is, with my old eyes, I just can't stand the
native resolution 1280x1024. Graphics are best at this resolution,
but text is terrible.

You can adjust the size of text for windows in all recent versions of
Microsoft Windows. I presume the same is possible in other GUIs.

But main question, what monitor would be good for me? I've tried
Microsofts Clear Type, and while that helps, it still is crap.
Also tried using large fonts.

If you are using a flat-panel screen, you really should run at the
native resolution of the screen. With some monitors, you can run at a
resolution that is a power-of-two fraction of the screen (e.g.,
800x600 for a native resolution of 1600x1200), and the results will be
quite nice--this is true for the better monitors. Others may not
display things so well, or may simply shrink the image.

ClearType makes a huge difference in the aesthetics of text on
flat-panel displays. It should never make things worse.

Instead of just using large fonts, go into the properties of the
desktop and adjust the typefaces and sizes for the fonts used on
window elements like title bars and so on. In individual
applications, set the fonts to whatever you find most comfortable to
read.

Overall, flat panels have razor-sharp resolution and this should be
very easy on the eyes, especially with ClearType.

20" is out of the question,
not for price, but because aren't 20" native resolution 1280xwhatever?
That would be even worse for my eyes.

I have such a display, and the usual native resolution is 1600x1200.
However, you could run it at 800x600 and it would be very clear (with
some monitors). 1024x768 wouldn't work as well because 1600x1200
isn't an exact multiple of 1024x768, so some pixels would be
interpolated.

 

[Mxsmanic]

I tried the DVI cable, no difference that I could tell.
At 1024x the text looks a little blurry, or "soft-focus" might be a
better term.

At 1280x, the text looks spiderweb thin.

Probably my eyes though, I have bifocals, and eye problems in general.

I don't think it's your eyes. It's just an adjustment on the monitor
that you need to figure out, whether it be font size, typeface,
resolution, or whatever.

If it were your eyes, ALL monitors would look equally bad.

But, just for kicks, can someone tell me the top rated 19" LCD
monitor?

I don't know if they are top-rated, but Eizo is very nice.

 

[Mxsmanic]

That's not going to help when reading websites that use fixed fonts.

Relatively few sites used fixed-size fonts. Most specify relative
sizes, or none at all, so that you can adjust font size by changing
settings in the browser. In other words, the site may specify "extra
small" for a font, but you can control how large extra small actually
is with settings in the browser.

 

[Mxsmanic]

I didn't like the global "large fonts', but I will try to set them
individually

Examine things like vertical lines and other graphic elements on the
screen under a magnifying glass and see if they line up precisely with
pixels on the flat panel. If they do, then it's just a matter of
adjusting screen characteristics to make the monitor as readable as
possible for your specific preferences; if they don't, it may be a
limitation of the video card (some cards have trouble with timing if
they are pushed to the upper limit of their resolution, and a monitor
may or may not be able to compensate for this).

 

[Mxsmanic]

I expect because on an LCD with a native res of 1280x1024 the fonts
look fuzzy at 1024x768.

They will be distorted because 1280x1024 is not a multiple of
1024x768.

As I have already stated, his solution is to
get a nice CRT monitor and run that at 1024x768. That's what I do. I
have an LCD too on my other computer but I prefer the CRT for various
reason, one being that I can run my CRT monitor at any res and the
fonts are sharp still.

It's certainly a solution for now, and an inexpensive one at that, but
what happens when CRTs disappear in the future?

I actually find that flat panels are much easier on the eyes than
CRTs, especially with ClearType enabled.